That I don't need to pay

[Notcms]

Opinions pls as I don't not know anymore if IABU.
I am a resident parent whose children go to other parent 2 nights every 14.
I am a high earner, and non-resident parent is a mw earner who works part-full time.
I am being told by professionals involved with the children that the difference in the childrens lifestyle is not fair, and I should be financially supporting the non resident parent.
I do not claim CMS or anything from the other parent although obviously I am entitled to.
Aibu to not hand over money to non resident parent who say they are struggling....or should I pay something?

His self esteem is no longer my issue. I can’t control what job he does, how many hours he works, how much he earns or how he spends his money. Or how many other children he has. Therefore I cannot be held accountable for his self esteem.” - also, assuming you are a woman and be a man, I would question whether they would be suggesting the same if the sexes were reversed as I don’t think they would ever suggest a man should be responsible for a woman’s self esteem after divorce
I'm not so sure because I'm wondering if the therapist actually said those words. There a lot of points that seemed to have gone unnoticed that have me wondering if that is simply how the 'advice' was taken.
There are also many, many posts on MN that demonstrate how beaten down some women become when tied to controlling men who use their money and their dominance to pretty much get what they want.
So, if the advice were different if the sexes were reversed, I could absolutely understand why when viewing it in that MN context.
There was a post where 'foodbanks' were mentioned and the 'secretiveness' seems to be a sore point but if someone has left a relationship where every move was controlled, the freedom to NOT share information with someone who has always used it against you must be considered.
I'm also one who rolls my eyes at those who go on to have a 'new' family without being able to support the one they already have but I can also see someone who may have 'lost' their children through the court to someone who bullied them into 'giving up' due to lack of financial resources or the lack of strength to 'fight' them

Of course, I have no idea about the truth of this situation or who is or isn't male or female but I can absolutely see why the advice may differ based on this. Personally, I think there are enough seemingly ambiguous comments from the OP that makes me wonder whether there IS more there is to this situation. I don't really think it matters though, and I'm not asking, because depending on WHO the OP is and what the complexities of the situation are, the OPs response may be crafted to evoke the response they want 🤷‍♀️

Think about the tickets. On the surface, seems like a lovely idea. Applying another context such as outlined above, totally different. Controlling. STILL manipulating the situation.

To be clear, I don't know what the true situation is and it may well be just as it appears. A CF just after money. The dismissive "it would be different if the NRP is a women" "women are saints, men are shit" posts just annoy me because they're usually used to minimise or justify certain situations

In two days with the NRP how much time is available for the 'nice things'?

Yes! I remember the rose petals perfume as well!! Great times

I find it odd that you refer to your children’s father as non resident parent
I think those 3 words say more about you than any financial difficulties.

NRP is cheeky, and I would take anything a therapist told me to do with money with a pinch of salt. The therapist should be focused on the kids' mental health and welfare, not the NRP's reluctance to provide materially for their DC 4 days in the month. It seems v improvident to have another child if they can't afford 4 days a month with the ones they already have.

What a head fuck!
I honestly wouldn’t. It’s totally backwards. The fact that you are not claiming for them seems just about fair as you are high earner but do not think that means you hand over cash for lifestyle activities.
They already have one scooter club, that’s enough!

It’s not your responsibility that Ex now has another child and is struggling financially.
I think you need to stay firm and not be guilted into paying extra.
The Therapist sounds gullible

Where does it say the NRP is a father? I thought NRP was used to deliberately avoid stating which parent

@Notcms what are the credentials exactly of this therapist? As a family therapist l see what they said as a massive over-step and rather unprofessional.

It's not your job to boost the self-esteem of your ex.
How come they are having other children if they can't afford the kids they have and pay no maintenance? Ridiculous.

If there was a huge discrepancy in lifestyle, so for example you as the father with millions, and them the non resident with no money living on universal credit and working part time.
Surely they might be able to go back to court for a better settlement.

My BIL pays a huge settlement for his first wife, and then separate support for the children. She does not have to work and is quite affluent, as the house is also paid for.

I would not pay any extra money.

It is in your children's best interests to experience and learn that people can and do (even themselves) live a more frugal lifestyle and are still happy and wonderful.
Your children have the basics, good food, medical treatment, a safe home, transport, education and there is nothing wrong with them experiencing that their father is poorer than you.

You could try spending much more time doing free activiities while the kids are with you. Equip your children with the mindset to find something interesting to do when they are bored and have not much money. Then, when at their Dad's place, they might be more satisfied. Are they asking for what he can't afford? Are they acting entitled and making him feel useless?

I would not be giving your ex any more money.
You could create a monster. Worse still, you could feed into your own children's expectation for unnecessary luxury and set them up for feeling like failures as adults if they do not achieve financial success similar to you.

Ultimately, your children should respect and love their Dad regardless of whether he treats them to expensive past times.

They need to know reality or they will grow up ignorant of how to entertain themselves and unable to be secure with less.

If the nrp is too poor to afford that they should do free community activities, claim benefits so that they can do swimming etc for free, watch a movie at home or work more hours when they aren't looking after children etc etc.
I'd be very tempted to put in a claim for child maintenance and put it in a savings account just in case you need it for this kind of thing and you can just give it to your kids when they go off to uni

@Notcms I agree with @TruthorDie …what kind of Therapist is so focused on money? I would actually have a face2face or email her about this…say you feel she is being biased…also the kids are not even with him for a substantial period of time to allow for a difference of lifestyle to occur! Swimming, cinema etc are normal activities…not ridiculously expensive. It is very clear he just wants an extra passive income. If you do it, it will set a precedent - not good. If you are going to be very generous, then do it because you still have some fondness/loyalty towards him with full understanding the money is not for your children, it is for him, new partner and new kid. Your children already have everything. Although, I would re-assess whether this ‘therapist’ is required any longer and how beneficial she has been for your kids…or the damage she is causing… It is ok to not want to hand your money out even if you have loads of it. The more money you have and save - the more you can provide and save for your children…life happens and you may not always have this income. Equally, life happens and he may earn much more in the future. 2 days!! Does the 2 days include the day of travelling to NRP and the day returning to you? If yes, then not even full 48 hours.

Of course you need to step up and do the best for your children. This not my problem attitude is very selfish

This doesn’t sound right, so I would be asking lots of questions. Might even be worth paying for a couple of hours of solicitor time to understand your rights. However, unless you’ve been legally ordered to provide funds for your children on the weekend they are with the other parent, I would not volunteer it because:

The children are with you for 12 out of 14 days.

Normally a NRP would be expected to contribute financially to support their children

NRP is not being transparent about their finances

NRP is living child-free for 12 out of 14 days and should be working and looking for additional ways to support their life.

I would be willing to respond to the therapist, so that you don’t look difficult, or they start throwing terms like “financially abusive” into the mix. Ask them why they think you should give NRP money when they are capable of working and are not transparent with their income.

Surely the therapist should be focusing on the kids, and not be looking at the wellbeing of the parents.

Although one might suggest that the NRP self esteem might improve if they started providing the bear minimum for their children that CMS mandates, rather than shirking any financial support for their children.

If your children get the nice things with you who provides for them 85% of the time, there’s nothing wrong with movie night, stories, games, park trips, free stuff when they are with the other parent, if they are a two parent household with another child why should you be supporting their lifestyle it’s ridiculous

Well, if NRP can not afford to give his elder children a decent lifestyle, they had no business having another child with someone else.

NO, it is NOT your job to support the NRP when they have THEIR children. The NRP can go get a better job, work more hours, get another job. Not just moan about how unfair it is and have some half-witted therapist agree with them. Just because they call themselves a therapist, doesn't make them any good at it, and it sounds like they are not.

It's not your circus and not your clown-car. NRP needs to step up, not whine for you to do more.

Whether you're a man or a woman, I wouldn't be paying the NRP some sort of life "subsidy" so s/he can work part-time. Presumably the children do more expensive things with you like swimming, cinema etc - you know during the 12 days out of every 14 days that you look after them. So the therapist thinks you should not only look after the children for the bulk of the time without claiming CMS but you should also pay your ex to facilitate the two weekends a month! You would have to pry the money out of my cold dead hands to get it off me. I'd get legal advice because I'm sure that the therapist is talking rubbish.

the issue then would be even if you gave £ amount who's to say it would be used for that purpose ?

The whole situation doesn’t make sense.

Post court case therapy recommended by cafcass. Is that post divorce?

Why were cafcass involved? The NRP doesn’t want more days, why did the kids need cafcas or therapy? Or why is there joint therapy going on?

This is post divorce therapy? But the NRP youngest child is old enough to go to school? So did the divorce take absolutely years? Or has therapy been going on years?

You are divorced. The NRP doesn’t want more access. So why is there mediation? There’s clearly more to this. Where did the money go they got in the divorce?

I wouldn’t be giving nrp a penny but this whole thing doesn’t make sense.

I would want clarification from the family therapist exactly what they mean by the childrens lifestyle difference being unfair. Are their living standards detrimental to the children? That's a major concern.

If it is providing leisure activities like going to the cinema and the children are only there two nights in every 14 (assume you mean every other weekend?), then I think it's a non-issue for you (and them). There are plenty of other things they can do with them that are free and give them an enjoyable time.

Child of the 70s here and cinema, swimming, ice skating, etc. were rare treats and 'fun' was generally board games, playing in garden, walks, play park and kite flying with M&D.

Out of interest, why do you have a family therapist mediating now when you are divorced and they have new partner and child (so time must have gone on)?

The non resident parent has them only 2 days a fortnight and can’t afford to take them out??? What about the park? Or playing at home? Those things are free.

Why are these people meddling with this? I really don’t see the point and think they’ve overstepped the mark.

If the kids were going hungry etc then I’d disagree.

Or is it a case that they only have them two days a week because they can’t afford to?

Buy them a book on free things to do in the area/tourist info. They could take a second job if only working part time. Supermarket/ bar work etc. My DD has 3 jobs because her career doesn't pay well and isn't regular money so she works in a shop 3 days a week and a restaurant two nights. She doesn't have family yet. If they are working long hours full time then that would be a bit different.I would be annoyed to have tickets thrown back at me and wouldn't give cash. Two nights isn't much. Board games, walks, local games/ park run can all be fun.